Why Would Anyone Think Democrats Want to Take Away Guns?
Jan 14, 2013
RUSH: A great example is Bill Clinton has been claiming in speeches lately (he didn’t mention the Golden Globes) that half of all mass killings in the US have occurred since the assault weapons ban was overturned in 2005. Even the Washington Post had to admit in a fact check that what Clinton claimed is not true. And, by the way, none of the legislation that would deal with guns post-Sandy Hook would have stopped it from happening.
None of it.
Not one piece of legislation.
But where did I put…? Did I not pull it out of the printer? Here it is. Yup, it’s a Cybercast News Service story: “Walmart reportedly has stopped selling ammunition ahead of the Obama administrationÂ’s anticipated gun control recommendations to Congress — and uncertainty over what new laws may be coming. According to the Investment Watch blog, Walmart Corporation will no longer place new ammunition orders pending ‘the upcoming decision on the Second Amendment.’ A customer stood with a Walmart employee as a call was made to the corporate office. Walmart headquarters told the employee the following:
“‘As of right now Walmart is not going to be making any new orders of ammo because of the upcoming decision on the Second Amendment. As of right now we are unsure of what new legislation might be coming, and because of this, we are suspending new orders,” under the theory that a gun isn’t worth much without any ammo. So people are buying guns left and right all over the country. Now, this just Walmart, but what if others fall in line? Well, we don’t know. We’re gonna suspend ammo orders ’cause we don’t know what Obama is gonna do on the Second Amendment.
What they’re not saying is, “and we don’t want Obama coming after us.”
RUSH: The Reverend Jackson was on America’s Newsroom today… I heard about this from the Gateway Pundit. I didn’t watch it, but the Reverend Jackson was talking about gun control, and he said that assault weapons are a threat to national security. He also said gun manufacturers should be held responsible for shootings. That is exactly what they did to Big Tobacco. Cigarette manufacturers are responsible for people that die from cancer, and who made out like bandits? The trial lawyers. So it’s probably safe to say the trial lawyers are universally salivating here over the Reverend Jackson throwing out the idea, “Hey, let’s sue the gun manufacturer.” It’s not a new idea, but as is everything now in this issue, it has infinitesimal much more weight.
All these proposals, by the way, grab sound bite 29. Here was Obama during the press conference today. He got a question from the ABC White House correspondent Jonathan Karl. “What do you make of these long lines we’re seeing at gun shows and gun stores all over the country? I mean, even in Connecticut, Mr. President, applications for guns are up since the shooting in Newtown.” You know, it’s amazing. The Drive-Bys really are beside themselves at the rapid increase in gun sales. They are totally flummoxed by it. You see, from their point of view, their coverage — well, just the event itself, the Sandy Hook massacre itself, in their worldview, should have had people volunteering to give up their guns for the purposes of public safety.
So when people don’t give up their guns, then the Drive-Bys get into real gear and start guilt tripping everybody, and they then think that the power of their influence will then make people give up their guns or support giving up their guns or support having their guns taken away, or what have you. When that doesn’t happen, and then record numbers of people show up to buy guns after Sandy Hook, they are flummoxed, can’t believe it, don’t understand it, it doesn’t compute. And you can see it here in Jonathan Karl’s question. “Mr. President, even in Connecticut they’re buying guns.” I guess in Connecticut you all should have volunteered to give your guns away after what happened at the school in Newtown.
All of you should have understood exactly what the media believes, that the gun is the problem and the people that own guns are the problem, and you’ve got to get rid of your gun. See what happens to people who have guns? You’ve got to get rid of it. The fact that sales are going through the roof even in Connecticut has them royally confused. And so Jonathan Karl’s question to Obama, “What do you make of all this? What do you make of all these gun sales? What do you make of people going out in record numbers even in Connecticut buying guns?”
OBAMA: I think that we’ve seen for some time now that those who oppose any common-sense gun control or gun safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government’s about to take all your guns away. And there’s probably an economic element to that. It obviously is good for business. This notion that somehow, “Here it comes,” and that everybody’s guns are gonna be taken away. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the case.
RUSH: Hmmm. I wonder who the president could be talking about there. The president said in his press conference mere moments ago that the reason you are buying guns in record numbers is because there are people, somebody out there, telling you that the government’s gonna take your guns away. That’s the only reason. The only reason. You see, in his mind, you don’t have one of your own. In the mind of your average Democrat liberal, you don’t have a mind of your own. That’s why you need them. You can’t think on your own, and when you do think on your own you come to the wrong conclusion every time.
So you can’t really be permitted to think for yourself. You’ve gotta have actions taken for you, limits placed on you, boundaries constructed so that you do not engage in your natural inclination to do bad things. The average liberal, I mean that’s the root of gun control, you can’t be trusted. You are not inherently good people. Liberals look out over the country and seethe with contempt when they look at average people. Average people are not predestined to good things. Natural people, if you don’t control ’em, will do evil, bad, rotten things. So you have to control ’em. That’s liberal thinking to a T. And right here it is expressed with Obama.
These people could not possibly be buying guns because they’re trying to protect themselves. They couldn’t possibly be purchasing guns because they worry that they are in danger. They couldn’t possibly be buying guns because they worry about new legislation. No, no. The only reason people are buying guns is because some irresponsible people in the media are threatening and telling them that somebody wants to take their guns away. And, by the way, these evil rotten people in the media are making a lot of money doing this. The people in the media that are telling you that the government’s gonna take your guns away don’t even really believe it. They’re just doing it to get rich. That’s what Obama said.
But strip it all away, and the bottom line is you don’t have a mind of your own. It’s even in Jonathan Karl’s question. Well, you might have a mind your own, but it’s an idiotic mind. What do you mean, even people in Connecticut are buying guns at record clip, even Connecticut after Newtown? What are you supposed to do in Connecticut? In their mind in Connecticut, after that event, you’re supposed to be so horrified that, not only do you give up your gun, but you demand that nobody else buy one either because you’re supposed to realize that the gun was the problem.
Now, why would people in this country think that Democrats have designs on their guns? Can somebody answer that question for me? Why would people in this country think that Democrats have designs on their guns? Who is it that’s constantly talking about the Second Amendment and what it should mean? Democrats. Who is it that’s always trying to come up with new ways to control guns, i.e., gun control? It’s Democrats, is it not? Who is it that, even now, is trying to come up with legislation to ban this weapon or that weapon? It’s Democrats, right? Who is it that’s suggesting a limit on the capacity of magazines in automatic weapons. The Democrats, right?
Therefore, why would anybody think that Democrats have designs on their guns? Could it be because Democrats do? Do you realize how much trouble I’m in for pointing this out? Does anybody doubt that if, say, Dianne Feinstein could, if she’d get away with it, she’d pass a law saying that you can’t buy any more guns. Does anybody doubt that she would do that? Do you think she’d try? Or Chuck Schumer, pick your favorite Democrat. But as far as the Democrats are concerned, you don’t have a mind of your own. You don’t have a thought process of your own. Well, you do, but it’s not good. People are not inherently good people. They’re inherently bad. That’s why they have to be controlled.
It’s not the big gun makers that are ginning up fears. It’s Joe Biden. I mean, it’s a Democrat talking about exploring ways to use executive orders to control guns. When people hear that, they put two and two together. They hear Eric Holder, 1995, say, “We gotta change people’s attitudes on guns. We gotta make ’em look at guns the same way they look at cigarettes: Get rid of ’em.” Do the Democrats expect that people aren’t going to hear them when they speak? Do they expect they’re not going to understand them when they speak? Do the Democrats think that people aren’t going to believe them when they speak? Should condom manufacturers be sued for unwanted pregnancies when a condom was used?
Brief timeout. El Rushbo serving humanity simply by being here, the essence of common sense blinding the country after this.
RUSH: I want to go back and play an Obama sound bite from the press conference. Actually, they’re both from the press conference today. Here’s the first one. We played it moments ago. This is the president suggesting that nobody wants to take anybody’s guns away. That’s just somebody in the media saying that and getting rich while saying that. But it’s ridiculous.
OBAMA: I think that we’ve seen for some time now that those who oppose any common sense gun control or gun safety measures, uh, have, uh, uh, a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government’s about to take all your guns away. And there’s probably an economic element to that. It obviously is good for business. This notion that somehow, uh, “Here it comes,” and that everybody’s guns are gonna be taken away. And it’s unfortunate, but, uh, that’s the case.
RUSH: Okay. So you heard him say. “These people in the media making this up. Nobody wants to take their guns away. And they’re getting rich doing so. They’re very effective about scaring people about the role of government in their lives. They’re very effective at this.” So Jonathan Karl, ABC asked the president this: “On the issue of guns, given how difficult it’ll be — some say impossible — to get any gun control measure passed through this Congress, what are you willing or able to do using your powers as president to act without Congress? What can you do? And I’d also like to know, what do you make of these long lines we’re seeing at gun shows and gun stores all around the country? What do you make of all these people buying guns now in record numbers?”
OBAMA: My understanding is the vice president’s gonna, uh, provide a — a range of steps that we can take to reduce gun violence. Some of them will require legislation; some of them I can accomplish through executive action. And so I’ll be reviewing those, uh, today and — and as I said, uh, I’ll — I’ll speak, uh, in more detail, uh, to what we’re gonna go ahead and propose, uh, later in the week. But I’m confident that there are some steps that we can take that don’t require legislation, uh, and that are — are within my authority as president. Uh, and, uh, where you get a step that has the opportunity to reduce the — the possibility of good violence, then I want to go ahead and take it.
RUSH: Now why would anybody be worried about what the government’s gonna do after hearing that? (summarized) “Well, there’s plenty I can do by executive order to reduce gun violence. I’ll do it in a fair and balanced way, common sense. I can do all this with the economic orders. I don’t even need Congress.” Why would anybody hear that and be concerned about what the government might be planning or what the president might be planning when he’s talking about using executive orders to get around Congress on all this? Why would anybody think these crazy thoughts that these irresponsible people in the media make you think?
I just wanted to share that with you.
RUSH: Connie in Florida, great to have you here with us. Welcome to the program.
RUSH: God bless you. I thank you so much, and that’s very nice of you to say.
CALLER: Well, thank you for being a pillar of faith and conservatism for those of us who think we are living in a surreal world. I called today because if lawmakers take money from gun manufacturers, the money is simply gonna go to the states, and they’re gonna put the money in general revenues like they did with the tobacco settlement and left lottery money for education, like here in Florida.
RUSH: Well, I’ll tell you. In this case, the objective primarily will be to get money to trial lawyers, but it’s also going to be to decimate the gun manufacturers. What she’s talking about is the Reverend Jackson is just the latest to propose that whenever there is gun violence… Well, “whenever,” except in Chicago. Exempt Chicago ’cause it’s Democrats. Whenever there is gun violence wherever, blame the gun manufacturers. Sue the gun manufacturer every time one of his guns is used. Harassment, paper lawsuits, and serious damages.
The effort’s gonna be to put ’em out of business, which is what they were trying to do with Big Tobacco. And then if it gets to the point you’re talking about — and this is way down the road, years and years, but if there are big settlements — then, of course, part of the deal will be that the money goes to the states to use for “gun safety programs,” and “education,” and all that. Now, you’re saying that just as happened with the tobacco lawsuits, the money will just be spent. It will not go to these specific programs, and it will not contribute one thing positive.
CALLER: Absolutely. I hate it when our society makes knee-jerk reactions to random bad things that have happened. We can never fully eradicate evil tendencies in humans.
RUSH: Wait a minute. Wait, wait, wait. You’re speaking now with too much bold and brazen common sense. I have found over the course of doing this program that the kind of thing you just said — you can’t eradicate evil tendencies in human beings — causes people to think that you’re insensitive, that you’re hateful, that you have no compassion. When you see the world as it really is, as you just articulated, you are said to be insensitive, unkind, mean-spirited, and an extremist. Because the left, of course, believes in the perfection of people.
The left believes in the perfection of everything, and that’s their objective.
RUSH: Here is Roger in Tampa, Florida. Thank you for waiting, sir. Hi.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. It’s a pleasure to finally get through. I’ve been listening to you since before you liked the game of golf.
RUSH: Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate that.
CALLER: Yeah, the clips that you played of the president’s presser today, you gotta give him credit for the use of language. He has a great way of using qualifiers to build a false premise. He says, “The fear that the federal government’s gonna take away all your guns,” the qualifier being “all,” you know, and somebody should ask, “Well Mr. President, which guns do you want to take away?”
RUSH: Yeah, you’re right. He does things like he uses focus grouped words and he creates straw men, “Economists from both parties have all agreed,” whatever he thinks. And then he’ll say, “As some have said,” when nobody has said it, and then he’ll create a lie. He uses terms like, “The American people agree with me. We have to do this in a fair and balanced way.” It’s focus grouped. Nobody opposes fairness. So all he’s gotta do is say that what he’s doing is a fair, balanced approach, and by intimation, the Republicans are not fair, the Republicans are cheaters, but his approach is fair and balanced, and you’re exactly right.
CALLER: He also used today one of his favorite words, that being “notion.” He said the notion that the government’s gonna take away everyone’s guns, that’s another qualifier.
CALLER: He uses that just basically to ridicule, demonize and marginalize those that oppose him. No one in the press would follow up with, “Well, Mr. President, then whose guns do you want to take away?”
RUSH: Right. Well, of course they’re not going to.
RUSH: And, of course, if this is absurd, then why are you and Biden exploring ways to use executive orders to do it? What are you actually gonna do? But you’ve hit on something. Obama doesn’t debate merits of policy. What Obama does is portray the Republicans as the enemy; Mitt Romney as the enemy. The merits of his policy, you never hear about the details. All you hear is that it’s fair and balanced, and everybody’s gonna have to pay their fair share so that everybody gets a fair shot. Of what? Socialism? What are we talking about? He never tells you. He benefits from the assumption that everything he intends or wants to do is great or good.
RUSH: Just today in his press conference Obama talked about the Republicans as hostage takers who have a gun to the head of the country. It’s that kind of talk that successfully demonizes opponents.